nasdaq newsroom legacy tech

Brazil BACEN Resolution 229 Impacts Credit Risk & DLO

BACEN Resolution 229


A credit-risk fine tuning that aligns with BCBS and impacts Brazil’s DLO reporting

Effective on January 1, 2023, BACEN’s Resolution 229 poses challenging requirements that impact the way financial institutions currently calculate credit risk and how they report it. In March 2023, all banking segments must include its new requirements in their DLO submissions. Although all BACEN-regulated banks are affected, the most significant impact is on the largest banks (Segments 1-3)
 

The Resolution’s outcomes can change a firm’s bottom line, and for several, the change is anticipated to be positive.


Resolution 229 falls under DLO — Brazil’s major umbrella risk reporting framework — the Demonstrativo de Limites Operacionais (Statement of Operational Limits). Its purpose is twofold: to fine-tune the credit-risk calculation methodology, and better align with the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s (BCBS) recommendations. And its arrival comes as no surprise in the context of the ongoing global Basel III reform trend. Firms in scope are on an evolving Basel journey that is becoming more complex — in Brazil and globally.
 

Basel III-Driven Credit-Risk Fine Tuning — Bottom-Line Implications.


The Resolution’s focus on credit risk directly impacts a firm’s capital requirement. It establishes procedures for calculating the portion of risk-weighted assets (RWA) related to exposures to credit risk subject to the calculation of the capital requirement using the Standardized Approach (SA) — a global trend under Basel III reforms. Indeed, the new Resolution improves the standardized credit approach, enabling a potential reduction in credit RWA exposures and in the total amount of regulatory capital held by financial institutions. In short, the Resolution’s outcomes can change a firm’s bottom line, and for several, the change is anticipated to be positive.

So, it is important that firms gather the right data and execute the calculations precisely. Especially considering its direct impact on a firm’s P&L, banks are strongly motivated to seek the most integrated and automated system to manage this Resolution’s and DLO’s overall complex data, calculation, and reporting requirements.
 

The RWA Rule Changes — More Granular, More Data-Intensive.


BACEN made two primary changes. Namely it:
 

  • Created new, more granular classifications for counterparties
  • Added new risk-weight rules

To comply with the new credit RWA calculation rules, banks must classify counterparties according to new segments. To achieve this, the bank’s processes must become more data and calculation intensive and accommodate more detailed downstream reporting. On the other hand, if such processes are effectively implemented, the Resolution creates an opportunity for banks to become more capital efficient via a more optimized approach to risk mitigation.

Globally, financial institutions are experiencing a common regulatory-driven push for more granular data reporting. With respect to Resolution 229, this challenge centers on the need to classify new segments (as shown in the following two examples) using more granular data that can be difficult for banks to capture and properly identify.
 

Prudential Conglomerates


Under the new classification, prudential conglomerates must be separated into three types indicating by how they are led as follows:
 

  • Financial institution
  • Payment institution that doesn’t have a financial institution as part of its operations
  • Payment institution that has a financial institution as part of its operations

Financial Institutions


This classification now comprises local and foreign qualified central counterparties (QCCP), non-QCCP, and entities operating financial market infrastructures, e.g., the Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI), and/or the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). For Resolution 229 purposes, they are all categorized as financial institutions and classified into three risk categories.
 

  • An institution that meets minimum capital requirements (MCR) and additional principal capital (ACP)
  • An institution that meets MCR but does not comply with ACP
  • An institution which, in the absence of public-domain information relating to MCR and ACP, presents a high credit risk

In sum, to comply with these examples and other Resolution 229 requirements, firms must execute more granular and automated segmentation, risk-weight assignment, and allocation processes. In turn, this increases the complexity of the RWA calculation, especially regarding the application and optimization of credit-risk mitigation.


Talk to us about your approach to BACEN Resolution 229, upcoming Resolutions, and DLO reporting. Adenza’s end-to-end risk and regulatory reporting solutions on a single platform will stand up to examination/audit, drive data usage, operational efficiency and TCO reduction.

Recommended For You

Get started with Nasdaq.

Contact Nasdaq AxiomSL

To begin a conversation about how we can help you quickly and efficiently identify data elements contributing to key regulatory reports and fully explain the aggregation or calculation process from source data to report.

Nasdaq AxiomSL

Future-proof your risk and regulatory reporting with an intelligent data management and analytics platform.

DISCOVER MORE ->

Additional Articles

Info icon

This data feed is not available at this time.

Data is currently not available